Glenn Beck to Rev. Wright: I’ll give you $150,000 for the dirt you have on Obama

posted at 7:41 pm on May 17, 2012 by Allahpundit

A companion piece to the audio files posted at The Blaze of Wright’s interview with author Edward Klein. As Beck says and as Ed noted a few days ago, the money line from O to Wright, allegedly, is “You know what your problem is? You have to tell the truth.” If that came from someone else, I’d chalk it up to a slick pol trying to flatter a troublesome friend into not causing him any more headaches. But after last week’s finale to his hypercynical slow motion “evolution” on gay marriage and yesterday’s reminder from Congress of how little O’s done to speak frankly with Americans about the fiscal crisis, this really is a nifty summation of his approach. If only the media hadn’t decided that this subject is off-limits, we might find out which political “truths” he thinks Wright’s in the habit of telling.

As for the truth about O’s attempts to silence him, Beck’s $150K offer is obviously a goof on the alleged bribe in the same amount by Obama pal Eric Whitaker to Wright in 2008. You would think the press might be hounding the White House about that given that (a) the program run by Whitaker recently benefited handsomely from an HHS grant, (b) this accusation is supported by audio of Wright himself making the charge, and (c) the idea of a crony bribing someone on behalf of his candidate friend sounds an awful lot like what John Edwards is on trial for. But no, apart from BuzzFeed (which got no reply from Whitaker’s office when it inquired) and a few others, apparently this story too is unimportant because it’s uninteresting/unhelpful/offensive. More stories about Mitt Romney’s dog, please.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Comments

Then, Breitbart drops dead on the sidewalk in LA. And NOW, the LA Coroner is poisoned to death with arsenic the SAME WEEK the full Breitbart autopsy report is coming out??? QUESTION: Was the poisoned LA Coroner involved in the Breitbart death investigation?

Forgetting the hysteria (on both sides), it seems to me that those who cared about Rev. Wright didn’t vote for Obama in 2008 & aren’t going to vote for him now anyway. The question is whether those who weren’t Obama true believers and were simply tired enough of 8 years of Bush last time to not care about Rev. Wright in 2008 will care now. I was in NC at the time — superpac Rev. Wright ads *did* run then and people did see them.

I don’t think the persuadable ones are going to care that much about Rev. Wright specifically in 2012, but I do think showing how much covering up the MSM does for Obama is something they might care about now.

I don’t think the persuadable ones are going to care that much about Rev. Wright specifically in 2012, but I do think showing how much covering up the MSM does for Obama is something they might care about now.

Dark Star on May 17, 2012 at 8:00 PM

THIS!

..one can bleed out just as dead from scalpel cuts just as readily as from cleaver cuts.

Elsewhere I commented on those that say it would be “real ugly” to use Reverend Wright in a campaign ad:

A bs story of a teenage Mitt bullying a gay. BS: everyone knows Mitt is a nice guy. And they call racist any attempt to show O’s 20 year preacher with his own words. It’s not racist, it’s HIS OWN WORDS!

Maybe it be ugly, but politics isn’t beanbag, and McCain style Mr. Nice Guy’s finish last. We’re tired of holier than thou goody two-shoes Repubs. O is the ugliest of all… you have to be ugly to show ugly.

The quotation may well be apocryphal, but it’s usually attributed to Sir Winston Churchill… Seems Sir Winston was caught up at some social gathering or other getting his ears bent by an overbearingly pretentious socialite, whose name probably began with “Lady” or “Duchess” or some such, and Sir Winston had finally had enough. So he turned to her and asked, “Madam, would you sleep with me for one million pounds?”

To which she replied, “Why, Sir Winston, yes I would!”

Then Churchill responded, “Would you sleep with me for one pound?”

Deeply offended, the woman shot back, “I will not! What do you think I am?”

Sir Winston came right back, “Madam, I believe we have already established what you are… we are now merely haggling over the price!“

Thank you very much! And just HOW does one die of arsenic poisoning???

We have some arsenic in our well water here in the Idaho mountains, can’t be avoided…7 years later, I am still here. Do you have ANY idea of how much arsenic this guy would have had to ingest to drop dead that quickly??? You don’t get that much by accident.

It’s a damn shame about our media…I still held on to the illusion that there were some, although a laughable minority, who would make a stand and go rogue by airing just such a story…in depth….prime time baby…on major network…but nope, ain’t gonna happen is it?

And in truth the whole Rev. Wright thing, whilst amusing, is actually a distraction. Bark is corrupt and has to go. Hail Mary passes on his BC, resume, and suspect buddies isn’t going to get the job done.

Obama wanted to give him $150,000 to shut up… to go away… basically telling Wright he was no longer useful… Wright tells how the Clinton campaign had already offered other Ministers cash to turn on Wright.Wright has already indicated by doing the interview that he has some problems with what is going on.

Beck is offering Wright $150,000 to come forward, to tell the truth.

Such a lovely way to entice a Reverend to do the proper thing as he sees it. He can even accept it as a donation for his church.

You would think the press might be hounding the White House about that given that (a) the program run by Whitaker recently benefited handsomely from an HHS grant, (b) this accusation is supported by audio of Wright himself making the charge, and (c) the idea of a crony bribing someone on behalf of his candidate friend sounds an awful lot like what John Edwards is on trial for. But no, apart from BuzzFeed (which got no reply from Whitaker’s office when it inquired) and a few others, apparently this story too is unimportant because it’s uninteresting/unhelpful/offensive. More stories about Mitt Romney’s dog, please.

You would think that this would interest Romney as it shows Obama’s lack of character, possible crony capitalism, and the whole Wright connection provides lots of insight into Obama’s radical views.

Yet apparently Mittens is McCain 2.0 and will “repudiate” any mention of Wright!

Yet it was ok to smear Santorum and Newt but Obama is off limits (not smearing but bringing up the truth)!

Yet apparently Mittens is McCain 2.0 and will “repudiate” any mention of Wright!

Yet it was ok to smear Santorum and Newt but Obama is off limits (not smearing but bringing up the truth)!

Makes me sick!!!

LevinFan on May 17, 2012 at 9:39 PM

Makes me sick that Levin thinks bellyaching about the primary — where Newt & Santorum “smeared” Romney just as much as he “smeared” them — is at all helpful at this point in time.

Makes me sick that Levin can’t get over the fact that the choice is between Romney & Obama, not ABR & Obama.

Makes me sick that Levin represents himself as some smart strategist but can’t see that the guy actually running for POTUS should stay above the fray and leave the dirty work to others. It’s called “plausible deniability” and its de riguer for successful politicians, but it is especially needed in this case, because if there is anyone who thinks that Romney could have said anything other than what he said and that would have either caused the press (1) to start vetting Obama and/or (2) not turned it around to attack Romney with it, I’ve got a bridge to sell you.

Here is what Romney should say w r t Obama + Wright :
1. If Obama has nothing to hide about his relationship with Wright, he has nothing to worry about . Let people do the investigations, it is their right .

2. What is wrong with being curious about the person who was so close to Obamas that he shaped their philosophy ? Afterall, American people have a right to know what the person who decides their destiny actually thinks about our country’s men and women.

3. The President attacks and threatens private citizens and now when people are curious about his associates, he is indignant ?

Makes me sick that Levin thinks bellyaching about the primary — where Newt & Santorum “smeared” Romney just as much as he “smeared” them — is at all helpful at this point in time.

Makes me sick that Levin can’t get over the fact that the choice is between Romney & Obama, not ABR & Obama.

Makes me sick that Levin represents himself as some smart strategist but can’t see that the guy actually running for POTUS should stay above the fray and leave the dirty work to others. It’s called “plausible deniability” and its de riguer for successful politicians, but it is especially needed in this case, because if there is anyone who thinks that Romney could have said anything other than what he said and that would have either caused the press (1) to start vetting Obama and/or (2) not turned it around to attack Romney with it, I’ve got a bridge to sell you.

Dark Star on May 17, 2012 at 9:48 PM

RINO’s like yourself make me sick!

So it was ok for Mittens to do it against his GOP challengers but not now right? You say he’s “staying above the fray”? I say BS, he’s a wimp just like McCain. Afraid of being called a racist for attacking Obama.

When Mittens Superpac was smearing Newt, reporters asked Mittens about it. Mittens said legally he couldn’t say anything about the PAC. The very next day when it was pointed out to Mittens that he legally could tell the PAC to stop, he responded by saying that this is politics and Newt needs to toughen up.

And Mittens doesn’t need to “repudiate” the remarks. He sounds like some wimp who has white guilt.

At the very least he should have the guts to say it’s pathetic that the very thought of a GOP superpac using Wright to attack Obama being such a huge story is a pathetic double standard. Especially right after they piled on Mittens for the haircut scandal and that there’s no mention of the American killing terrorits that Obama just released. Why doesn’t Mittens at least fire back with that???

… Could it be b/c he’s a spineless wimp?? Just like when he wouldn’t call Maobama a socialist and said he was “just in over his head”. Mittens is doing the voters a disservice by sugarcoating the truth. It makes people think the Obama really has our best interests at heart and just needs some more time to get it right. Mittens would never have the guts to say the truth about Maobama: that he’s fundamentally transforming America on purpose to make us a socialist ruin ruled by our superiors.

Then, Breitbart drops dead on the sidewalk in LA. And NOW, the LA Coroner is poisoned to death with arsenic the SAME WEEK the full Breitbart autopsy report is coming out??? QUESTION: Was the poisoned LA Coroner involved in the Breitbart death investigation?

Scotsman on May 17, 2012 at 7:45 PM

Fire melts steel, Zero is from Hawaii, Lee Harvey was a good shot and Breitbart had a heart attack.

Staying above the fray worked out very, very well for Obama. Pay attention.

Dark Star on May 17, 2012 at 10:05 PM

Obama stayed above the fray ?
I don’t remember Obama repudiating his favorite uterine detective about his fetish and slandering of baby Trig ?
I don’t remember Obama repudiating his goons when they rip apart Bristol Palin, eventoday .
I don’t remember Obama repudiating his thugs in the media and OWS for actually instigating and commiting violence .
Obama openly associates himself with every anti-American White hating cop-killing entity , he is never above the fray.
He is active as a racist thug and his true faceneeds to be exposed, over and over again.

Obama stayed above the fray ?
I don’t remember Obama repudiating his favorite uterine detective about his fetish and slandering of baby Trig ?
I don’t remember Obama repudiating his goons when they rip apart Bristol Palin, eventoday .
I don’t remember Obama repudiating his thugs in the media and OWS for actually instigating and commiting violence .
Obama openly associates himself with every anti-American White hating cop-killing entity , he is never above the fray.
He is active as a racist thug and his true faceneeds to be exposed, over and over again.

burrata on May 17, 2012 at 10:21 PM

Well said. Don’t forget this one:

I don’t remember Maobama giving back that $1 million to Bill Maher!!

Or I don’t remember Maobama criticizing the media for trying to blame Palin for mass murder after Tucson!

I don’t. Mitt very thankfully is not John McCain. It’s May for gosh sakes. Everybody lighten up.

oldroy on May 17, 2012 at 10:33 PM

Then I’m afraid you haven’t been paying attention. By repudiating an attack that didn’t even happen Mittens has completely taken it off the table. Mittens said he’ll stick to the economy, so now he can’t go back on his work later in the campaign on any other questionable associates from Maobama’s life.

Plus back in December Mittens refused to even call Maobama a socialist “saying he was just in over his head.”

It wasn’t hard to see this coming. Really I don’t see hardly any difference between Mittens on McCain on this.

This is one of many reasons why Newt or Santorum would’ve been much better: they’re willing to fight the corrupt media and won’t bend over like Mitt McCain.

I’ll argue to the nth degree in all CAPS with a Paulian. And I argued to the n – 1 degree about Mitt – before he was the unquestionable nominee. But that time has passed, and now were all on the same team. If were not, then whose team are you on?

Someone needs to ask Romney whose team he is on ?
Is he running for POTUS for himself or the country ?
If he is running for us, then he better make it about us, NOT HIM.
We want to win, we want him to win, does he himself want to win ?
If he does, then he should stop acting like that loser McCain and STFU if someone is helping him !

Someone needs to ask Romney whose team he is on ?
Is he running for POTUS for himself or the country ?
If he is running for us, then he better make it about us, NOT HIM.
We want to win, we want him to win, does he himself want to win ?
If he does, then he should stop acting like that loser McCain and STFU if someone is helping him !

burrata on May 17, 2012 at 11:03 PM

Exactly!!

You have a billionaire on our side trying to do the right thing and before any ads even come out you have Mittens “repudiating” it!

You don’t have to get into the fray much when you have a billion dollar media that takes care of things for you.

oldroy on May 17, 2012 at 10:31 PM

That just proves my point from earlier — anyone who thinks Romney could have given any other “official” answer today that the billion dollar media wouldn’t have used to attack him with is out of their gourd & can’t be part of a rationale, realistic argument.

Seriously, if Romney had said he approved of such attacks, instead of saying he repudiated them & this campaign should be about the issues, what do you honestly think would have happened? Because the Levin crowd is arguing that he should have done exactly that given the state of Obama vis-a-vis the media. You have to play the hand you are dealt, not some fantasy hand that the GOP nominee can personally call for attacks on TehPrecious & think that is going to have any kind of realistic play. The attacks need to come from the rest of us, not Romney himself. That’s the reality.

That just proves my point from earlier — anyone who thinks Romney could have given any other “official” answer today that the billion dollar media wouldn’t have used to attack him with is out of their gourd & can’t be part of a rationale, realistic argument.

Seriously, if Romney had said he approved of such attacks, instead of saying he repudiated them & this campaign should be about the issues, what do you honestly think would have happened? Because the Levin crowd is arguing that he should have done exactly that given the state of Obama vis-a-vis the media. You have to play the hand you are dealt, not some fantasy hand that the GOP nominee can personally call for attacks on TehPrecious & think that is going to have any kind of realistic play. The attacks need to come from the rest of us, not Romney himself. That’s the reality.

Dark Star on May 17, 2012 at 11:42 PM

You keep missing the point. The media is going to ruthlessly attack Romney no matter what he does.

The last thing he should do is not attack Obama on a very legitimate issue like Wright out of fear of how the media will react.

If Romney fights it will most importantly fire up conservatives, the very ones who weren’t excited about McLame until Palin came along.. the Levin crowd. He may even convince some independents of what a dangerous radical Obama really is by doing so as well.

You may be missing the point. Romney will be “severely” attacked thru his Mormon religion because of its history of biogtry and racism. This biogtry is mostly non-existent now at least on the surface and I am sure Mitt is not a bigot or racist. Mitt does not want to battle over religions because of this. The other comment about us doing the battle is right on. If he has our back, we must have his heh?

They are lost. Worry about the ones beginning to see the rust on Oboobi’s armor. Bring people the truth and trust that they will process it. If the recognition of the abject failure of the past 3+ years doesn’t sway them, what more can we do?

Concerning Zimmerman, he has been saying from the beginning that “this guy looks like he was up to no good”, “I don’t see any evidence he was attacked by Trayvon”, etc.

On the bake sales: yes, he admits the bans and regulations are silly, and is even planning a nationwide bake sale event to protest. All good there, but then he went on to tell people to make sure they get any permits they need before doing that.

Gandhi (who Beck cites almost incessantly) made his mark by NOT following British law – this is the nature and true clout of civil disobedience. So many people violate the unjust law, that the authorities cannot prevail.

So what’s the point in having a national bake sale protest when everyone runs out and complies with the unjust law?

I would be happy knowing what killed the man who looked at Obama’s passport records, or the three men killed at Rev. Wrights church who were openly gay or any of the other mysterious deaths surrounding da One.